On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> use
> > of the pervasive and common word God in the context of the .God namespace
> is
> > not a valid one.
>
> Why not. ICANN has no legitimacy to "grant" rights into a TLD.
> Only the ISPs decide if a TLD is a valid one or not. If they decide to
> resolve .God Domains, then it is a valid TLD.
> If Joe would have the money he could pay e.g. EarthLink to resolve his .God
> domain names. I don't know if Joe has
> such sums...New.net has it.
>

One of the things I always try to point out to people is that the "visible
namespace" is governed by one thing: consensus. Everyone could decide
tomorrow to start resolving or using different roots and it wouldn't
matter what ICANN or anyone else thought about it. Things might get
a little chaotic though.

The economics are stacked against entities like New.net if they are
paying earthlink to resolve them, but I've always said a couple turns
of events could break things wide open.

Lets say Redhat, Debian, Slackware linux-es and Free/Net/OpenBSD decided
tomorrow to bundle the ORSC root in their distributions instead of the
legacy IANA based one.

That, would make a difference.

Not saying if its a good thing or a bad thing or how (un)likely it is.

The other interesting thing I like to think about (once I get started)
is the desirability of IN-visible private namespaces. The alternative
namespaces exist on the fringes because of "lack of visibility" but
almost certainly there are entities who thrive on that to their own
advantage. My favorite example is if Cult of the Dead Cow had a resident
DNS guy on board they would almost certainly be operating a privately
visible .CDC top level domain and they don't necessarily *want* to be
publicly visible.

But bringing it back to the practical side if Tucows started offering
these alternative spaces, nobody is holding a gun to anybody's head
to sell and support them. We didn't touch IDS, but we'll do DNS for
any damn domain name you want, visible or not. (We do have a handfull
of New.net users using us for DNS, we even had a .USA once)

I think we even had an enquiry about whether someone could use a .GOD
name on our system or not.

-mark

-- 
mark jeftovic
http://www.easydns.com
http://mark.jeftovic.net

Reply via email to